Philosophy and the Art of Reason: Let us enter the high country of the mind

I did the capitalizing to show the distinction between both forms of quality.

Nothing is required, but for human quality to be understood it must be "measured" as you put it.

Human quality can be gaged. All forms of measurement are arbitrary.

I regret that I don't have the time to state all of my viewpoints. I have already done so before on another thread. You are of course right that Which one? is no answer to the question. It is the question that must be asked for a correct answer. Which quality is defined by life?

 

We are inherently in agreement on these points. You speak of Quality as do I. I say that human quality is not true Quality still.

 

If you have not helped you have not aided. Like I said, helpful is a matter of timing so helpful is not inherent but is a kin to function. Ask what a thing is for everything having a time and a purpose and on this basis you decide if any application is needed.

Here is a screwy example. If you had a screw to be screwed in, using a screw driver would be helpful, saying that screw driving is good would not be helpful as far as driving in screws is concerned. Driving screws willy nilly would be not so good as screwy.

 

To stick with your example, would one not say when screwing in the screw that using a screwdriver was neccesary? Help is percieved through the same lens as most things in the world. No helpful is not an inherent thing in the world. Neither are Good and Evil.

 

Here are the forms of quality,

1. standard: the general standard or grade of something
2. characteristic: a characteristic of somebody or something
3. essential property: an essential identifying nature or character of somebody or something

Let's say we do that using standard, characteristic, and essential property as the metrics.

Not if they are standard, characteristic, or essential.

If you mean what qualities are evident in life I would say luminosity and vibration.

 

Good definition above. You are right. to say that these things are all defined by Quality. Who or what defines standard, characteristic, or essential? Is it not humanity? If so then are they still not arbitrary conjecture based off of human understanding? I was asking if Quality itself is defined by human existance not the sub qualities such as luminosity and vibration. You are still right though, man.

 

No. Helpful is a kin to function. You may screw in a screw with a pliers. Helpful continues to be a matter of timing. Time and it's energetic relations are our most precious commodity so it's purpose must be to learn to use it wisely, (efficiently.)
Screwdriver saves time and energy and according to these purposes is helpful in the screwing of screws.

 

Still one could then define the saving of time and energy as good. If one does not then why bother saving either or?

 

Speed of light is not arbitrary conjecture. Standard, characteristic, and essential are determined through comparison as long as the comparisons are on equal terms.

Luminosity and vibration are the essential qualities defining human existence.

 

What purpose to define as good?
We have the essential impulse to be or we are inherently devoted.
If you are faced with certain demise, the relative quality of life does not matter, only that you have it.

 

There is no logical purpose to define anything as good or as evil.

 

Still who defines the speed of light? Who defines what is equal and unequal? We do not disagree about qualities of human existence.

 

Knowledge is, being shared.

 

Knowledge is, being shared.

Your question amounts to is there something to measure and I would say you are real.

 

You would say that I exist yet I would say that how do I know that I exist? Can I measure myself?

 

Our lives are of indefinite proportions but I notice I do not make you up and you do in fact take measurements and make them. You can measure yourself but it is not necessary that you do.

 

Or perhaps it is like looking at a reflection in a river. We think that we percieve what it is that we see but yet when a pebble is introduced we see only the disturbance. Could it not be that we percieve of reality because it makes more sense than to percieve of the disturbance without it?

 

No we continue to see reflections and a pebble. Be more precise in your launch points for reasoning and you will end up more on target.

Consciousness emerged for the purpose of finding direction. We believe to see, there must be food out there and see to confirm our belief or find food.

 

The existence of consciousness is well understood, the premise behind the understanding of that consciousness is not.

 

Really. Consciousness is the light by which things are seen, you need to see because you are looking for something.